Floor Statements

Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

I rise in opposition to the Welch amendment and in strong support of H.R. 2021, the Jobs and Energy Permitting Act, a piece of legislation that would create jobs in America and American energy for American consumers.

The Welch amendment requires a company applying for a permit to provide data on ``oil subsidies provided by the Federal Government.'' Mr. Chairman, this is an absolute red herring. There's no definition of ``oil subsidy.'' That's intentional. The gentleman who proffered this amendment is an attorney. He ought to know better. I don't know what oil subsidies to which he's referring.

Section 199, manufacturing deduction, which goes to all businesses whether they produce oil or otherwise, so long as they're engaged in manufacturing. Maybe he's referring to the writing off of intangible drilling costs and claiming tax credits for employing American workers. If those qualify as American Government giveaways, that should absolutely be something that I would think that he would support. These folks are paying royalty taxes and giving great revenue to the United States Treasury.

This piece of legislation, without this amendment, will create many jobs and revenue for the United States Treasury.

What Mr. Welch is really interested in, Mr. Chairman, what this amendment really does is it attempts to punish oil companies for producing American energy and American jobs. This piece of legislation, H.R. 2021, will do just that, and this amendment attempts to stop it.

If there were subsidies that applied only to the oil industry or specifically benefited folks who purchased traditional oil and petroleum, I'd be the first to rise and say, You're right; that's a subsidy. We ought to get rid of it. But that's not what this amendment attempts to do. Rather, this amendment attempts to stop a piece of legislation that will create energy; will lower the price of gasoline for American consumers; will, again, add jobs all over our country; and, once again, provide American energy so that American consumers may benefit.

I'd like to urge all of my colleagues to oppose the Welch amendment and support the underlying Jobs and Energy Permitting Act.

With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on May 26th, I missed rollcall vote No. 376 because I was in Kansas for a funeral.

Rollcall No. 376 was a vote on the Small Business Additional Temporary Extension Act of 2011. Had I been present, I would have voted, ``yes.''

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I wanted to come to the floor today and thank Chairman Rogers and the ranking member for the great work they've done.

I do not sit on this committee, but I did have the opportunity to serve in uniform our country. We witnessed what happened in the capture of the world's greatest terrorist, and we saw the great military feats which took place, but we also know all of the enormous work that our intelligence community did to make that happen.

I served in a unit that patrolled the East German and Czechoslovakian border. Every day, we relied on the fact that our intelligence community was providing our military with the finest information and the finest data in as near realtime as it possibly could to make sure that we knew how to deploy our forces and knew the things that needed to be done to keep America safe.

So I want to applaud the efforts of the Intelligence Committee. I want to urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation and the intelligence community, which keeps everyone in America safe.

Mr. Speaker, on May 5th, I missed Rollcall vote numbered 295 because I was unavoidably detained in an Energy and Commerce hearing.

Rollcall No. 295 was a vote on the Holt Amendment to H.R. 1230, Restarting American Offshore Leasing Now Act. Had I been present I would have voted ``no.''

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3, the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act.

Over the past 35 years, Republican and Democrat Presidents, as well as Republican and Democrat-controlled Congresses, have all agreed that American taxpayers should not be forced to fund abortions. Unfortunately, 14 months ago, with the passage of Obamacare, President Obama and Democrats in Congress rejected decades of consensus and abandoned the American people. Crafted behind closed doors and manipulated through the legislative process--despite major opposition by the American people--Obamacare not only attempts to destroy the American health care system, but it fails to protect the most innocent among us, the unborn.

H.R. 3 will fix this problem created by Obamacare, while also establishing a government-wide prohibition of funding for abortions. This bill prohibits funding for elective abortions and insurance coverage that would include abortion. It prevents health savings accounts (HSAs) from being used to pay for abortions and protects the rights of conscience by making the Hyde-Weldon provision a permanent fixture rather than having to be renewed annually. This legislation is not only essential policy, but it is also morally imperative.

Madam Speaker, the Obama Administration is openly hostile to pro-life policies. We cannot allow the administration discretion over abortion policy, as with Obamacare. The permanent establishment of the prohibitions in H.R. 3 will reverse the erosion of protections for the unborn advanced by the Obama Administration. We must act now to preserve the rights of the unborn for future generations.

I firmly believe that every unborn life is precious and should be protected. Therefore, absolutely no taxpayer money should be spent on abortions, directly or through subsidized health plans. The No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act ensures that these protections are permanently established. I urge my colleagues to join with me in supporting this important bill.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1213, a repeal of a mandatory piece of spending inside of ObamaCare that will do a great deal to not only destroy health care in America but destroy jobs in Kansas and all across our country.

I spent the last couple weeks back in the district. I was in Greenwood and Elk and Chautauqua and Montgomery County, in Butler County and Sedgwick County. I heard the ranking member today say he wants us to do the people's work. I will tell you that every day I heard about people that were frightened by ObamaCare. I talked to business leaders that understood that the last thing they wanted to do was to hire a full-time employee because of the burdens and obligations that would come from this piece of legislation.

I was proud at the very beginning of my time in Congress to vote to repeal the entire bill, and I am equally proud today to attempt to put back in the box this mandatory spending provision. This spending provision gives, without any oversight, any restraints, the Secretary of Health and Human Services powers that are very, very large. I happen to have a special perspective on that.

Today's Secretary of HHS was my Governor for the last 8 years. The last thing that we want to do in health care is to give my former Governor an unlimited checkbook. We have seen what that has done to Kansas. I know what that will do to the United States of America.

This is very clear. When we talk about health care, what we are talking about is trying to find a way to reduce costs. The absolute worst thing you can do if you are trying to reduce costs is give the government an unlimited checkbook. They will spend it. They will spend it every day. They will spend it all the time.

I urge the strong support of H.R. 1213 so that we can stop this horrible piece of mandatory spending.

Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Murphy amendment.

I heard my colleague speak. He talked about it being a sad day, a day when Republicans and Democrats cannot agree about the importance of environmental safety and clean air. I could not disagree more. Those of us on our side care deeply to make sure we've got clean air and clean water and safe drinking water. We care deeply about that. It is not a sad day.

I've been here in Congress for 90 days. Yesterday marked 3 months on station. The Democrats have been talking about jobs bills. Where are the jobs bills? Well, here's one. Here's the first of many. If we can begin to peel away the burden and the disaster that are the regulations that EPA is beginning to place on our country, then we will once again create an environment where the private sector can create jobs, where we can once again create manufacturing jobs.

Until January 5 of this year, I was in the manufacturing sector. I was making things in the private sector. And I watched as government got in the way and made it expensive, drove up the cost of energy so that our products were not competitive. We are now, beginning with H.R. 910, to peel that back, to take on the task of restoring opportunity for Americans once again to manufacture here in our country, for those folks who are struggling to begin once again to afford energy for themselves, for their families, and for our small businesses.

I oppose the Murphy amendment because it guts what we're trying to do in H.R. 910, which is to once again put America back on a course that says we're going to have safe air, we're going to have clean drinking water, but we're going to do it in a way where the private sector can create jobs, we can grow our economy, and we will not have to have the unemployment rate that we have struggled through for the last 2\1/2\ years.

Mr. Chair, I rise in support of H.R. 658, the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act. I appreciate Chairman Mica and Chairman Petri for crafting a fiscally conservative bill that meets the significant needs of our aviation sector.

Having previously run an aerospace company for 10 years and now having the honor of representing the Air Capital of the World, Wichita, Kansas, I know first hand the importance of this legislation.

First of all, I want to thank Chairman Mica for including a provision of mine in the Manager's Amendment that will allow the FAA to increase the number of UAS Test Ranges around the country. These Test Ranges are essential to fostering innovation and private sector development of the Unmanned Aerial System industry. If implemented properly by the FAA, I believe research and development and manufacturing hubs will grow up around these ranges. I know of several communities in Kansas--including El Dorado, Salina, and Herington--where a Test Range not only makes sense, but could help stimulate the local economy.

Second, I want to thank the Chairman for not including something in this bill: User Fees. Aviation user fees would devastate the general aviation industry. User Fees would place an unnecessary administrative burden and unwarranted additional costs on the system users. Simply put, these Fees would hurt the General Aviation manufacturing industry, which has already lost tens of thousands of employees due to the global recession.

Lastly, I want to highlight the inclusion of a Repair Stations provision. This section implements a risk-based inspection regime consistent with the U.S.-E.U. aviation safety bilateral agreement. This provision supports 130,000 American jobs, including many in my home District.

This is a good bill which deserves this body's strong support. I urge my colleagues to join with me in voting for this important legislation.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to recognize the tremendous accomplishment of Wichita State University and its men's basketball team. Shocker Basketball is rich in tradition, with 10,000 screaming fans at nearly every game.

For the first time, Wichita State University is now the reigning champion of the National Invitation Tournament. Last Thursday, they finished their tourney run with a convincing victory over a worthy opponent, the Crimson Tide of the University of Alabama. This was a glorious cap to an excellent season.

This year, the Shockers won 29 games, the most in the university's history--losing two games to Final Four opponents during the season by a total of only five points.

It is my honor to congratulate Wichita State University, its President Don Beggs, athletic director Eric Sexton, the basketball team's head coach Gregg Marshall and his staff, and all the great young men who played their hearts out in New York to bring the title back to Wichita.

A great season for the mighty Shocker Nation.

MTXE. Go Shox.

I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.

This amendment is actually pretty straightforward. It's pretty simple. The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 called for the creation of a public consumer information database. And last year, the agency adopted a database rule that fails to uphold the statute. The statute required that the agency not allow materially inaccurate information to be on the publicly available database, and yet the rule, as promulgated, actually requires the agency to post materially inaccurate information. Indeed, it requires the agency to post that material and accurate information within 10 days. This will drive jobs overseas. It will increase the cost for manufacturers and consumers. The National Association of Manufacturers has announced its support for this amendment. The Home Appliance Manufacturers, the American Home Furnishings Alliance, the Consumer Specialty Products Associations all have recognized that this regulation is terribly onerous.

The request of this amendment is very modest. It does not ask that this go away. It just asks for a delay in implementation. It asks for some time for the committee to review this regulation and come up with a regulation that makes sense and is consistent with the statute. So I would urge the support of this amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Emerson).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 15 seconds to my colleague from Texas (Mr. Barton).

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I urge regulatory sensibility in the support of this amendment, and with that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment to return just under $8.5 million to the United States taxpayers by sending $8.5 million to the deficit reduction account.

In November, America elected a different set of leaders to this House of Representatives. They elected a set of leaders who understand job creation. But the EPA has not gotten the message. This Congress has refused to pass cap-and-trade and yet EPA continues down the road to try to implement cap-and-trade through regulations when there is no statutory authority to do so, and it's beyond its constitutional powers.

My amendment takes on only one very costly piece of the EPA's effort to destroy jobs, the Greenhouse Gas Registry. I'm not against bridal registries or even the registration of property

deeds, but forcing businesses to comply with these unnecessary and burdensome regulations will destroy jobs in Kansas and all across America. This registry drives up the cost of doing business all with the asserted mission of satisfying the left's obsession with regulating every nook and cranny of our existence.

Now EPA would, I'm sure, tell you that they are simply collecting a little bit of data on greenhouse gases, that this registry is just a very innocent effort to learn a little bit more about who is emitting greenhouse gases, who or what. But this data is the very foundation of the EPA's effort to pursue its radical anti-jobs agenda. Indeed, continuing the Greenhouse Gas Registry at currently funded levels will permit the EPA regulatory nose inside the job-destroying tent. We cannot head down this path.

The amendment I am proposing is very modest. In 2006, the registry had $3.2 million appropriated. That was increased to almost $16 million. I'm simply trying to roll back the amount of money that this registry has to 2008 already bloated levels.

Mr. Chairman, until about 45 days ago, I was in the private sector. I was running a small business. I can attest to you that this Greenhouse Gas Registry, an attempt to implement cap-and-tax, will destroy jobs in Kansas; it will increase the cost of manufacturing for every Kansas airplane manufacturer; it will increase the cost of energy for every Kansas farmer, and it will increase the cost of energy for every Kansas family.

With unemployment at record levels and energy prices already high, America cannot afford this additional government mandate, and our taxpayers would be well served by reducing the funding to this misguided Greenhouse Gas Registry. Please join me in rolling back to 2008 levels the amount of funds appropriated for the Greenhouse Gas Registry.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment that will reduce spending for the International Forestry Program by $7.4 million. Some on the other side have said $7.4 million isn't very much money when we have a deficit of a little over $1.5 trillion. In Kansas, that's still a little bit of money.

This program started out a long time ago to provide funds for saving the Brazilian rainforest. But like so many programs that had good intentions, it's morphed, it's morphed into something terribly different. Just this past year, this program funded field trips for students in Mexico to follow the migration of monarch butterflies. It funded research in China to protect the Panda habitat and make sure that we didn't have the infestation of forest pests in China. I think the Chinese can fund themselves if someone thinks that's a worthy task. Last year, the International Forestry Program funded a study on the declining hummingbird populations in the western United States, Canada, and Mexico.

Mr. Chairman, there are difficult decisions to make when the country is at this point in its economic life, but this is not difficult. These are precisely the kind of programs that Americans sent a new Congress to take care of to make sure that we're not doing things that make no sense for America. So I would urge support for this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

I yield to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).

Reclaiming my time, it is the case that Mr. Flake's amendment addresses a very important issue, and that's duplicative processes and duplicative agencies. As a former soldier, there is nothing I care more about than making sure we take care of our airmen, our sailors, our marines. I think it is a great place to start to make sure we do just that by eliminating this from the Department of Defense appropriations bill.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chairman, let me begin by thanking Chairman Rogers and Ranking Member Dicks for the hard work that they did on the Defense appropriations bill. It was yeoman's work in difficult and challenging fiscal times to present a defense budget that makes sense for America. And there is no one who's come to Congress as a Member of this new freshman class who believes more strongly in making sure we have a strong national defense. It's for that reason that I move to reduce spending in that budget by $502 million with the amendment that I am proposing. This $502 million is spread among various procurement and research and innovation programs, and it is money that was not requested by the Department of Defense. This $502 million could certainly go to some program that they had asked for, but it's in a place that used to be reserved for earmarks. There is no particular program to which this $502 million is attributed. It goes assertedly for innovation. But we all know that innovation occurs in the private sector. And that's what this new majority is about. It's wrong to add $500 million to our deficit for a series of programs with no particular purpose except for the needs of businesses that once survived on those very earmarks.

And so, while I am very pleased with the fact that this piece of legislation has removed earmarks and has moved us towards a great deal more transparency, I would urge my fellow Members to vote for this amendment so that we can continue to get rid of the very vestiges of earmarks that voters asked us to get rid of.

I yield back.

Madam Chair, I would just like to add that I came from that very sector, small business. Until 45 days ago, I was running one, and I understand how small business works.

What we don't need is government taking our money and handing it back to folks. What we need is to be left alone. We need smaller government. That's my core problem with the legislation for SBIRs. Government doesn't do a very good job of picking out which of those small businesses will be successful and which piece of technology will prove to be the one that will be good for our warfighters.

If it will shrink government, if it will reduce taxes, then those small businesses will be successful. They will provide those technologies, and they will take wonderful care of every one of our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to amend the Defense appropriations bill by cutting $115 million of additional funding. This $115 million is aimed at alternative energy inside the Defense Department appropriations budget. I will assure you that with the President having advocated in his budget for billions of dollars of alternative energy research, development, and other types of research, that we don't need $115 million of that in our Department of Defense budget.

This funding is wasteful, it's duplicative, and won't help our soldiers. It's in five different parts of the appropriations legislation in small amounts, and this is new money. It's above and beyond that which the President had requested.

We are not underfunding alternative energy research. Just this week, the Rand Corporation came out with a study talking about alternative energy research in the defense budget and they concluded it was not helping our soldiers, our sailors, our airmen, and our fighters.

So I would urge support of this amendment reducing by $115 million the deficit that our Nation faces.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Offered By: Mr. Pompeo

Amendment No. 545: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Offered By: Mr. Pompeo

Amendment No. 546: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Offered By: Mr. Pompeo

Amendment No. 547: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following: